Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 15
LANGUAGE
English 15
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
at the department of defense. let's ask the military. >> ask you for an update on pentagon drone operations. >> probably not. >> well, let's hear what you have to say when i ask the question. >> okay. >> it has now been widely acknowledged that the u.s. military earlier this year, the military, pentagon, flew drone operations over pakistan's border region in cooperation with the pakistanis to collect reconnaissance information and show it to them. can you talk about why the u.s. military is now flying drone operations or did fly drone operations over pakistan? >> i can't. i know you say it's widely acknowledged. i don't know how widely anything has been acknowledged on that count. i don't think it's appropriate for me at this podium to discuss operations that may or may not be taking place. >> what concerns do you have that these u.s. government drone strikes in pakistan may be backfiring now and simply creating more enemies of the united states? >> i refer your questions to other people. that's not something we speak to or are involved in. >> who would you refer them to, jeff? where should
it all down is now the hard right battle cry. slash spending, short the pentagon. crew up traffic control whatever raises the noise level, bashes the democrats and lowers hope. is this the tea party dream? is this john boehner's version of feeding time at the zoo, giving the crazies what they want so they will sit in their seats and behave? is this final payment to insanity the last vestige of what calm republicanism is ready to cough up? but how else can you explain the readiness of the gop leadership to let this fraken stein's monster, it doomsday machine, this sequestration go all out berserk? how else can we understand the party of lincoln doing such economic damage to the republic, such damage and moral to the people. democrat ed rendell and republican michael steele. gentlemen, i want to start with you, michael, because i know you will disagree with me and that's what this is about. i read a lot of good reporting today, not analysis, but good reporting from your side of the aisle, further right than you i believe, that says, great, let's have sequestration. let's short the pentagon.
are desperate to solve this problem. >> if you had a choice of saving the pentagon or playing golf with tiger, what would you do? >> i'd play golf with tiger. but that's two guys talking here. i don't begrudge the president two days off. he's earned that. >> he needs it. >> and the congress isn't there for nine days either. my point s neither side seems to view this as urgently as the american public. >> oh, no. i wasn't doing that as a subtle dig. i would golf with tiger and figure out a way to save the pentagon. >> maybe while you're golfing with tiger. maybe tiger had some ideas. i don't know. >> long time between holes on that course. >> good things happen when presidents are golfing with famous people. back in 1997 bill clinton got a phone call while he was golfing with michael jordan in vegas. he got the horrible news that -- true stroory. i get to say this because i'm a former politician. he got the news that if he did nothing, the budget was going to balance itself alone without any of his help. so he quit, rushed to the airport and came back saying, we have to do something fast so i
cain and people who don't want -- it sounds like rhetoric, literally don't want the post filled at the pentagon because of their grudges. >> julian, the senate will take up mr. hagel's nomination when it reconvenes in ten days atime but i want to bring in something from richard hass. here he is with our own joe scarborough. >> we're hearing in the end most likely he's going to pass and be secretary of defense, so why hold him up over a recess when the pentagon desperately needs somebody at the helm? >> because in a funny sort of way, joe, it's exactly what mccain said. it's a way of getting their pound of flesh. >> julian, pound of flesh. is that really what this is all about? given that our troops deserve a leader because they serve with every ounce of their bodies, they give their bodies. >> well, i don't know that they will get a pound of flesh and it is a rizable reason. politics is about picking good fights. this is a fight the republicans will lose and it's a bad fight and you wonder why after what's happened to the republican party they continue to pick bad fights they're going to lose.
. republicans are refusing to allow a vote to confirm the former colleague to run the pentagon. it's the first ever filibuster against someone nominated for defense secretary. but hagel's opponents say they're not filibustering. they're simply demanding a 60-vote threshold to end the debate. thanks for clearing it up. a vote is scheduled for friday when they try to get the votes necessary to move the process forward. john mccain backed away from the pledge not to filibuster hagel's nod. he says he is waiting to see if the obama administration responds to calls to offer up more details about the deadly attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. >>> leon panetta minced few words but what is most likely the last press briefing on the job. with the threat of a march 1st sequester looming, he lashed out at congress. he thinks they could be crippling with price cuts. >> oftentimes i feel luke i don't have a full partnership with my former colleagues on the hill in trying to do what's right for this country. we need to find solutions. we can't just sit here and. [ beep ] we can't just sit here and com
recall holler at the pentagon or increase taxes, i would assume the latter to make sure that we didn't lose our capability to maintain our super power status. as conservatives celebrate what would have been ronald reagan's 102nd birthday, a reminder that even the beginner raised taxes 11 times during his presidency in compromise with democrats. given that, finding common ground both inside and outside the party might not be such a bad look. john meacham, i will give you the first question. welcome to the program. we're so happy to have you here. >> thank you. >> is this rebranding effort going to work for the republican party? >> it might because it depends himself on what it is rebranding itself against as events unfold. so president obama has about 12 months here. >> don't you think in terms of who they are rebranding against, the competition, if you will, if we're talking marketplace term, the democrats thus far, for the most part the democrats kind of have it together in a way they historically have not. >> well, sort of. i mean, we still don't have a budget. we don't have a gran
. they don't receive combat pay and it's absolutely ridiculous. so recently, the pentagon established that a woman that serves in combat is entitled to receive all of the things that go with it to show our country's appreciation. so it seems to me that if we're going to have a draft and i really believe that if we did have a draft set up that congress would not be so anxious to the democrats and republicans to put our young people in harm's way. >> tell me why you say that because you're introduced this legislation multiple times and it's clearly something you're very committed to. you bet your life because the people in the congress that allow these things to go on, they have no fear that anyone in their community and their families are going to be making any sacrifice at all. less than 1% of americans, most of whom volunteer for economic reasons paid the price in terms of 6600 lives lost, tens of thousands of people wounded. veterans, american veterans coming home, disoriented, unemploy unemployed, some homeless and no one pays a price. i submit to you, we would not be in iraq, afgh
the pentagon. like don't cut a single thing, but i'm going to go out, i'm going to keep talking about rich americans. i'm going to keep talking about corporations. i'm going to play to my base instead of talking -- telling middle-class americans they're going to have to make some sacrifices. along with the rich. it's that mika, it's a permanent campaign. and i guess if this is how he wants to run things, he's president of the united states, good luck over the next 3 1/2 years. >> i don't understand why loopholes are even an argument, first of all, why he has to go this far. why he has to keep talking about it. >> hold on a second. >> i know. >> we all agree that these loopholes need to be closed. >> well, let's do it. why is it so hard? >> i've been talking about supporting warren buffett's idea. >> why are we still talking about it? >> because the president only uses it to demagogue in a permanent campaign. he never talks about the other side of it. he always says oh, it's the rich. >> that would be loopholes. >> don't tax you, don't tax me, tax the rich guy behind the tree. >> steny hoye
connell's office? not quite. the senator bucked the question to the pentagon, and here is a look at the letter courtesy of "wired" magazine. i am writing on behalf of a constituent who has contacted me regarding guantanamo bay prisoners receiving post-9/11 gi bill benefits. i would appreciate your review and response to my constituent's concern. well, in some alternate reality where the whole thing were true, wouldn't it be more than a single constituent's concern that gi benefits were going to terrorists? anyway, somebody in mcconnell's office called it a humorous misunderstanding. you think? another headline on duffle blog's site reads, syria to host iraq war re-enactors. what people will believe. the gullible out there. >>> up next, the republican party has lurched too far to the right. it's one thing to hear a democrat say it, but a republican? and that's ahead. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. now, here's one that will make you feel alive. meet the five-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max says ha. c-max says wheeee. which is what you get, don't you see? cause c-max has l
take some hits at the pentagon and federal programs you can blame the republicans for or would you rather go out and sign onto a cut in medicare that hurts every one of your people, ticks off most of your party? makes you look like you have given the store away. if you're barack obama politician, maybe you're thinking maybe i can dig the sequester after all and this is the problem. everyone says they hate sequestration, everybody would rather have it than have to do something they really, really don't want to do. i'm joined by the nation's john nichols and michael shearer with "time." the reason we're probably going to have sequestration, we're probably going to have all kinds of problems is because it's better than having to do what you don't want to do. republicans don't want to raise taxes. democrats don't want to touch the entitlements. >> i agree with that but i think it's better in short term. the republicans and the white house have cal vat clated and only one will be right if they let this happen they will be in a stronger position in two weeks going into a government shutd
to oppose his nominees for top cabinet slots at the pentagon and cia. republican senator lindsey graham threatened to hold up those picks until the white house delivers more information about the attacks in benghazi. >> i don't think we should allow brennan to go forward for the cia directorship, hagel to be confirmed as secretary of defense until the white house gives us an accounting, did the president ever pick up the phone and call anyone in the libyan government to help these folks? what did the president do? yes, i'm going to ask my colleagues just like they did with john bolton, joe biden said, no confirmation without information. no confirmation without information. >> you are saying that you are going to block the nominations -- you're going to block them from coming to a vote until you get an answer? >> yes. >> now, john mccain has already think that he doesn't think republicans ought to filibuster this. what will you do? you're just going to put a hold on it? >> yeah, i'm not filibustering. this is a national security failure of monumental proportions, and i'm not going to st
in discretionary. we could actually clean all the waste out of the pentagon which is well over $100 billion a year. it still doesn't solve our problem. we cannot solve our problem unless we change medicare to save it and put a competitive model into our health care system that will allocate that scarce resource. it's really interesting. just yesterday the cms has finished going through all this bidding on durable medical equipment. and the statement coming from cms, for the first time, is hey, we just figured out competition works. about a 41% savings on durable medical equipment not just for the federal government but for the seniors who are going to be doing their co-pay. so competition works. and if it will work -- it works in this area, health care will work in the rest. we've just got to have a little pain. that happened to me as a child frequently with a popular switch. >> okay. well, there you go. >> there's a bumper sticker for 2014. >> chuck, good morning. senator, good morning. chuck, quick question for you. what are the odds you place on sequester going through and two, a government shu
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)